How I came to the difficult decision to support Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination

JEFFHEAD.COM ^ | Feb 4, 2008 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

What follows are my reasons for supporting Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination. I will admit upfront that Hunter and Thompson were far and away my 1st and 2nd choices for the GOP bid. I do not like the fact that I must now consider a 3rd choice...but that is the way things have turned out and given the remaining field and the stakes, I must choose the best I can. It is a sad day in our nation that this is the case...but it is.

Mitt Romney has an unarguably strong record in the private sector managing, making over, and creating busineses that were not only profitable, but that employed tens of thousands of Americans. Detractors will point to the fact that in some instances, employees were laid off when he either consulted with, or managed certain companies and had to cut out excess or failings to improve the bottom line of the organization.

Would those same detractors rather that the entire business fail? That all of the employees lose their job? Let's face it, our economy is a free market economy, not some socialistic economic farce like the marxist nations adopt that attempts to relegate employment and work to a state entitlement. In the free market, business succeed or fail based on their profitablity. Succeeding is good for every one, the individuals employed, the management, the share holders (if there are any), and for the economy. Mit Romney has made a career out of understanding this and making it happen.

...and this is not to mention, which you will never hear from those same detractors, the fact that Mitt has created businesses that employ far, far more people than he ever had to let go. Like Staples for example.

I might add...this management on Mitt's part goes far beyond what one of his chief opponents and detractors has tried to make light of as "merely managing". It takes a real leader to manage in the fashion that Mitt has done in business. Decision making, leadership, getting people on board with the necessary changes and then moving forward. Mitt clearly has been able to do this in the private sector and to marginalize that accomplishment and effort by either discounting it as simply "hiring a manager", or equating it to not wanting to have someone who "hands you a pink slip", is a slap in the face to the entire private sector and smacks of narscistic and socialistic views of the free market economy which is so critical to the well being and health of our society...including its government. Those other candidates prove by their own words a basic misunderstanding of the free market economy, and an almost contempt for it. Mittt understands the free market and what it takes to be successful in it like no other in the race and it is a critcal issue facing us all.

Now, let's talk about Mitt's changes. Mitt comes from a culture, the LDS faith, that believes people in a society which is free, should obey and sustain the law. It is engrained into the fabric of that culture. Even when you do not agree with it. Mitt was a bishop and a stake president in that organization...volunteer, non-paid, leadership positions where he faithfully executed and put forward to the members of his church in that area the church's position on any number of issues...most notably abortion and homsexuality. The LDS church is one of the most outspoken opponents of abortion and homsexual agenda. Mitt could not have held those positions (before his political career) without sustaining the church's position on those issues.

So, what happened? This is something that has troubled me. Despite a faith that decries these things and is reconginzed as among the most conservative segments of society as a whole, Mitt, when running for governor of MA, one of the most liberal states in the union, vocally supported abortion rights and homsexual rights, , but extending to the 2nd amendment as well. I believe Mitt ran on those planks for several reasons, none of which I agree with. One, his parents were fairly socially liberal, as he indicates with his refernce to his mother. She was personally against abortion and would not have ever had one...but she supported the so-called "right" to choose.

This is a key to understanding Mitt's earlier position.

I believe Romney has always been personally against these things...but since the law of the land said it was "legal" he rationalized his support of it using his mother's "I am against it but feel that people should be able to choose", to rationalize his own political position in a liberal state where that type of thing was required to get elected.

Second, his cultural position in the LDS faith to "support and sustain the law" led him to rationalize supporting and sustaining bad law in these areas in conjunction with his political career.

I do not agree with any of that. Never have, never will. Irrespective of what a group of people "proclaimm" as the law, as the Supreme Court did in 1972, there is still fundamental right and wrong. Romney was wrong on this...he convinced himself to politically support "laws", and follow the example of his parent on something that was intrinsically wrong, as evidenced by his own personal feelings against it.

But, like Reagan, who also changed positions on the very issue of abortion, Romney changed. He admits it openly. He says he was wrong. I believe that changing hearts and minds on this issue is a big part of the fight and I will not discount a man who has professed that change openly nd publically. I will welcome the change...although I personally would have rather seen several years of support for the new positoion before supporting Mitt for president. Unfortunately, I do not have that luxury in this election. But I have listened closely to people like Santorum, Hastert, Tancedo, and others who have discussed just these issues with Romney before endorsing him. I believe those men...and I believe in my own heart that Romeny can and has changed.

The platform and issues Romney is running on now are, therefore, much more closely aligned with my own. From the War on Terror (which Romney correcly identifies over all his conteders as a war against Islamic Jihad), to the battlefronts in Iraq and Afganistan, to Gitmo, to ANWR, to abortion, to marriage, to his economic policies, to taxes, and any number of other issues...Romeny is now much more closely aligned with my own feelings on these issues than any other GOP candidate, and certainly than either of the democratic candidates.

I also know this about Romney...he is a man that tries to keep his commitments. From his clear virtue with his wife and family, to keeping business promises, to keeping his political promises. He takes notes specifically on those promises and then tries to fulfill them. I believe he will do the same here and be true to the commitments he is making and the people who are lining up and supporting him.

As a result of all of this, and despite the fact, as I have said, that Hunter and Thompson were far and away my 1st and 2nd choices...with the field that remains in the GOP, Mitt Romney now has my vote and support in this election. I believe he has the positions, I believe he has the conservative support, and I believe he has the resources to carry the fight to a successful conclusion against McCain and then against the democrats.

If he wins, I believe he will hold the line against the DNC, and against the members of the GOP who tend to align with liberal issues. I believe he will continue to take the fight to the enemy in the war, and believe he will institutue economic policies that are much more healthy and much more sound and good for the nation than either the tax and spend liberals, or the compassionate conservative spending policies of the current administration. Romney is much more likely to leave us fiscally sound than any of the other contenders.

I also know that there are others who fundamentally disagree with this. So be it. They have a right to their feelings and their research and their decisions based upon it. Particualrly in an election where the GOP is down to 3rd and 4th choices I will not discount or smear them for it. It is their right to do so...it is their duty to study it out and make their best decision. I may not agree with their decisions at this point, but I support them in coming to their own...and will try and rationally set forth my own reasoning in an attempt to influence others.

Finally, I will personally also not join the ranks of those who will either not vote at all, or vote for the DNC as an effort to try and bring about such bad conditions that the conservatives must change. I would rather, for the sake of my family and community, find someone who will hold whatever ground possible, than give it ALL over to those whom I know will take away as much ground on all fronts as possible. That is a course that is, IMHO, fraught with danger. We may lose too much ground and not be able to get it back in our lifetimes, or those of our children. I will not risk that. But that is my opinion and my own decision and the direction I will choose throughout this election.

Having said all of this, admittedly, Romney still has has a huge mountain to climb. Big name party leaders (of the Ford and Rockefeller variety IMHO) are lining up behind McCain and Huckabee seems intent on splitting what remains of the conservative vote. But with what happened in Maine on February 2, where Romney won with a majority over both McCain and Huckalbee combined...and with the overwhelmimng majority here on FR now supporting him (and this is probably the most conservative site on the internet), and with the backing of people like Hastert, Santorum, Tancedo, and so many others...I believe Romney does has the best chance, and he has my support in going for it.

[Jeff Head]

No problem and sorry for the typos and mistakes. It is self published and I hope ou enjoy the series and the story despite whatever errors.

Same is true of my article here. I hope people can get past the human frailty part and understand the message and appreciate it as sincere...even if they do not agree.

[gunservative]

I think by October, if Romney is the nominee, and I’ve been looking at either Obama or Hitlery on the other side, I’d probably more easily vote for him.

[La Enchiladita]

If Rush says, Vote for Romney, let me know....

[Jeff Head]

Thanks for that explanation. Clear reasoned dialog and respect for our decisions based on conservative values and a love for our nation and what it is based upon go a long way in working together.

Of ourse it helps that I agree with your analysis, hehehe.

But even if you had leaned the other way I can appreciate the reaons you would at this stage, even if I did not agree.

[Camel Joe]

I look at it this way, it took Jimmeh Carter screwing things up in Washington to get us Ronald Reagan. So if we’re going to send a liberal to Washington I want to be sure they have a D after their name and not an R. Who knows, we may end up with a real Conservative for President after 4 years.

[Jeff Head]

You are weclome...and I understand the diffcult position we are all in full well. Good luck and God’s speed in your decision.

[OPS4]

Republican Presidential Nomination
Republican Delegate Count

Polling Data
Poll Date Sample McCain Romney Huckabee Paul Spread
RCP Average 01/30 - 02/03 - 42.8 24.5 17.9 6.0 McCain +18.3
CNN 02/01 - 02/03 412 RV 44 29 18 6 McCain +15.0
Cook/RT Strategies 01/31 - 02/02 308 RV 39 24 18 6 McCain +15.0
Pew Research 01/30 - 02/02 513 RV 42 22 20 5 McCain +20.0
USA Today/Gallup 01/30 - 02/02 867 LV 42 24 18 5 McCain +18.0
CBS News 01/30 - 02/02 325 LV 46 23 12 9 McCain +23.0
ABC/Wash Post 01/30 - 02/01 LV 48 24 16 7 McCain +24.0
FOX News 01/30 - 01/31 297 RV 48 20 19 5 McCain +28.0
Rasmussen (Mon) 4 Day Tracking 800 LV 33 30 22 5 McCain +3.0

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html

[Jeff Head]

Understood. Romney has a huge hill to climb. But in Maine on Saturday, and here on FR, the results went contrary to the polls...so I have hope. We shall see what Tuesday brings.

[tortdog]

I’m not a McCain fan, but attacking him on the war on terror is absurd. McCain has been a stalwart, in the face of strident criticism.

[ansel12]

“I believe Romney has always been personally against these things...but since the law of the land said it was “legal” he rationalized his support of it using his mother’s “I am against it but feel that people should be able to choose”, to rationalize his own political position in a liberal state where that type of thing was required to get elected.”

---

“Willard Mitt Romney donated $250 in 1992 to then-U.S. Rep. Dick Swett’s (D New Hampshire) successful re-election campaign. The one-term congressman served another term before losing to Republican Charles Bass in 1994. Two years later, Swett ran unsuccessfully against Republican Bob Smith for one of the Granite State’s U.S. Senate seats.

In 1992, the former Massachusetts governor and current Republican presidential contender (voted for Tsongas in 1992), also donated $250 to Rep. John J. La Falce (D New York) and $1,000 to Douglas Delano Anderson, an unsuccessful Democratic primary candidate for the U.S. Senate seat held by Utah Republican Jake Garn, who retired that year.

So, between July 1989 and October 1993, Romney exclusively financed these three Democrats.”

[OPS4]

Republican Presidential Nomination
Republican Delegate Count

Polling Data
Poll Date Sample McCain Romney Huckabee Paul Spread
RCP Average 01/30 - 02/03 - 42.8 24.5 17.9 6.0 McCain +18.3
CNN 02/01 - 02/03 412 RV 44 29 18 6 McCain +15.0
Cook/RT Strategies 01/31 - 02/02 308 RV 39 24 18 6 McCain +15.0
Pew Research 01/30 - 02/02 513 RV 42 22 20 5 McCain +20.0
USA Today/Gallup 01/30 - 02/02 867 LV 42 24 18 5 McCain +18.0
CBS News 01/30 - 02/02 325 LV 46 23 12 9 McCain +23.0
ABC/Wash Post 01/30 - 02/01 LV 48 24 16 7 McCain +24.0
FOX News 01/30 - 01/31 297 RV 48 20 19 5 McCain +28.0
Rasmussen (Mon) 4 Day Tracking 800 LV 33 30 22 5 McCain +3.0

[LeBaron0627]

“that leaves Huck and Romney.”

I gotta go with Huck. Romney’s history of betrayal is too clear to ignore.

[xzins]

dartboard and blindfold

I agree.

I don't really see any difference between the two. I don't trust romney and I don't trust mccain. I'll probably pull the lever for whichever wins, and that'll probably be McCain unless Romney pulls a rabbit out of his hat in the next 8 hours. Real Clear Politics' average of polls has McCain up by 18 points.

All those who support Romney better get ready to be disappointed. The polls indicate that McCain will come out of Super Tuesday with about 850+ delegates to his name.

Me....I don't support anyone who's left. I'm already disappointed.

I think, though, that I'll de-register as a republican.

[Paulus Invictus]

Well said, Jeff! Mitt is far more preferable to me rather than McLame, who is a RAT in RINO clothing. Can Mitt win the primaries and defeat McLame? Hard to say, but let’s hope.

[restornu]

You’d be just as well off with a dartboard and blindfold these days.

***

You just don’t understand the heart of a LDS!

At many times I have been so guilty of be more natural man in my response, than being more Christ like.

We are counseled to not be sarcastic, snarky, holier than thou, being insulting etc.

We are to be humble yet firm in our convictions; we are to be engaging with those, we should be courtesy and thoughtful of others who even those we disagree with.

We are to share and motivate with the love of Christ to persuade one another to do the right thing.

So many have taken what they evaluate by the world standards towards Mitt Romney.

I understand none of us are perfect on earth but we should strive to do our best and waiting on the Lord to assist with the rest.

I am amazed at how Mitt has stood among all these firing darts!

IMHO

[marron]

I love Bush, when you compare him to the guys he ran against I am so, so glad he was the man in the White House over the last 7 years. He is essentially a decent man, and he has shown considerable courage at times, and for all of that I appreciate him

We have also had to push back several times to keep him from giving away the store. And I am irritated in particular with his view on immigration reform and his unwillingness to secure the border. A good man, with whom I disagree on some rather important issues, and we’ve had to throw a fit several times over the last few years.

This is what I expect from Romney, a thoroughly decent man, with good instincts, very capable, and we will have to watch him like a hawk and throw the occasional fit to keep him from compromising on things that we care about. It just goes with electing flawed human beings to office. You never get to go on auto-pilot.

[Jeff Head]

I’m hoping that the count is more like 650 for McCain and well over 400 for Mitt...but we shall see.

[Jeff Head]

Thanks. Indeed...let’s hope, and then act on that hope by trying to influence others in a reasoned way.

[nonsporting]

Neither of these men (McCain and Romney) are acceptable.

Time to choose a different candidate.